PDA

View Full Version : Lesbians' Brains React Differently



billy_campbell
May 9, 2006, 6:09 PM
Study: Lesbians' Brains React Differently
By RANDOLPH E. SCHMID, AP Science Writer
Mon May 8, 11:18 PM

WASHINGTON - Lesbians' brains react differently to sex hormones than those of heterosexual women, new research indicates. That's in line with an earlier study that had indicated gay men's brain responses were different from straight men _ though the difference for men was more pronounced than has now been found in women.

Lesbians' brains reacted somewhat, though not completely, like those of heterosexual men, a team of Swedish researchers said in Tuesday's edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

A year ago, the same group reported findings for gay men that showed their brain response to hormones was similar to that of heterosexual women.

In both cases the findings add weight to the idea that homosexuality has a physical basis and is not learned behavior.

"It shows sexual orientation may very well have a different basis between men and women ... this is not just a mirror image situation," said Sandra Witelson, an expert on brain anatomy and sexual orientation at the Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario.

"The important thing is to be open to the likely situation that there are biological factors that contribute to sexual orientation," added Witelson, who was not part of the research team.

The research team led by Ivanka Savic at the Stockholm Brain Institute had volunteers sniff chemicals derived from male and female sex hormones. These chemicals are thought to be pheromones _ molecules known to trigger responses such as defense and sex in many animals.

Whether humans respond to pheromones has been debated, although in 2000 American researchers reported finding a gene that they believe directs a human pheromone receptor in the nose.

The same team reported last year on a comparison of the response of male homosexuals to heterosexual men and women. They found that the brains of gay men reacted more like those of women than of straight men.

The new study shows a similar, but weaker, relationship between the response of lesbians and straight men.

Heterosexual women found the male and female pheromones about equally pleasant, while straight men and lesbians liked the female pheromone more than the male one. Men and lesbians also found the male hormone more irritating than the female one, while straight women were more likely to be irritated by the female hormone than the male one.

All three groups rated the male hormone more familiar than the female one. Straight women found both hormones about equal in intensity, while lesbians and straight men found the male hormone more intense than the female one.

The brains of all three groups were scanned when sniffing male and female hormones and a set of four ordinary odors. Ordinary odors were processed in the brain circuits associated with smell in all the volunteers.

In heterosexual males the male hormone was processed in the scent area but the female hormone was processed in the hypothalamus, which is related to sexual stimulation. In straight women the sexual area of the brain responded to the male hormone while the female hormone was perceived by the scent area.

In lesbians, both male and female hormones were processed the same, in the basic odor processing circuits, Savic and her team reported.

Each of the three groups of subjects included 12 healthy, unmedicated, right-handed and HIV-negative individuals.

The research was funded by the Swedish Medical Research Council, Karolinska Institute and the Wallenberg Foundation.

___

On the Net:

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: http://www.pnas.org

Cid87
May 9, 2006, 6:28 PM
Why aren't bisexuals mentioned?

glantern954
May 9, 2006, 6:32 PM
Cuz we arent stinky?

innaminka
May 9, 2006, 6:34 PM
I think it just reinforces what a lot of people - esp my full-on lesbian friends have known:
That they were "different" from birth.
Being gay is not something that you decide you might be - its something that's hard-wired in. Just that accessing takes different life-routes.

And you can't learn not to be gay, regardless of how hard you try, much to the chagrin of organised religion.

As far as us Bi's go ........ maybe we've got a bit of both... I hope so ;)

jedinudist
May 9, 2006, 8:07 PM
Seems to me that I recall seeing a similar study on gay men a few years back.

And yet.....

They still don't get it!

Oh sure- we all chose to be this way. Nothing like choosing to be a social outcast to make life fun!

(sarcasm- the language of those in the know - LOL)

bhg08054
May 9, 2006, 8:22 PM
Why aren't bisexuals mentioned?
<sarcasm>
Because of the earlier "study" that proved there is no such thing as bisexuals!
</sarcasm>

Mimi
May 9, 2006, 9:59 PM
Cuz we arent stinky?
*sniff sniff* smells pretty rosey here! :tong:

mimi :flag1:

CherryBlossom74
May 10, 2006, 2:15 AM
You know, as far back as we can recall we have had same sex attractions, too. They won't start REALLY studying Bisexuals til we "Exist" for them. Perhaps when these studies on homosexuals prove their other myths to be as false as a fair Republican, then maybe they can turn to looking in on us and why we feel as we do.

Then...MAYBE...they'll see we're real and stop making us feel bad because we are not so neatly placed in their ideology.

BiBiologist
May 10, 2006, 9:34 AM
I think this is a really good start. This sounds like an open-minded set of researchers. A year or so ago when they were studying gay men, we would have said "why don't they look at women?" and now they have. The next question in my mind as a researcher would be the Kinsey scale, and whether there is a continuum of responses in self-identified bisexuals, or if there is a whole other mechanism at work. Thanks, billy_ for posting this.
sam

JohnnyV
May 10, 2006, 12:18 PM
Eh, I'm skeptical. On such matters I defer to human history, which presents us with 6,000 years of people being able to control their sex lives with practical reasoning. The quest to find the genetic code is futile, and a little scary. JohnnyV's not a fan.

J

BiBiologist
May 10, 2006, 1:38 PM
"...6,000 years of people being able to control their sex lives with practical reasoning."

????
Hmm, I'm pretty skeptical of that, Johnny.

jedinudist
May 10, 2006, 2:13 PM
"...6,000 years of people being able to control their sex lives with practical reasoning."

????
Hmm, I'm pretty skeptical of that, Johnny.


I agree. We can't control our spending urges with practical reasoning, how the hell do they come up with controlling the most primal of urges with it??

LOL- and our taxes pay for this idiocy???

Not slamming anyone's opinion, just feel in my gut that there is too much evidence of Bisexuality throughout history to believe it was "controlled" by any reason.

Just recently, a few soldiers interviewed on NPR from Afghanistan talked about how in that culture it is often said by most of the men- "Women are for making babies, men are for fun".

I do believe I am Bisexual From Birth! I have always felt this way and have gone through years of literal hell trying to cram myself in the box defined by religion and society.

No More!

just my :2cents: add 3.97 of your own and you can get a cup of coffee at Starbucks ;)

JohnnyV
May 10, 2006, 3:54 PM
Touché, Bibio and big... But I didn't say we could control our primal urges with practical reason. Just our sex lives. Which means, we may be programmed to want something, but we choose what we seek and on what terms. Otherwise we'd be controlled by biology, which I'm not prepared to concede. Whatever I do, sexually and otherwise, I take full responsibility for. No "devil made me do it" or "it's in my blood." By the same token, no guilt.

J

jedinudist
May 10, 2006, 4:10 PM
Touché, Bibio and big... But I didn't say we could control our primal urges with practical reason. Just our sex lives. Which means, we may be programmed to want something, but we choose what we seek and on what terms. Otherwise we'd be controlled by biology, which I'm not prepared to concede. Whatever I do, sexually and otherwise, I take full responsibility for. No "devil made me do it" or "it's in my blood." By the same token, no guilt.

J


True, I agree. We cannot apply practical reasoning to eliminate attractions or urges, but we can indeed control our decision to act/not act upon them.

I'm just slightly ticked off that even though study after study has shown that most folks do not choose their sexual orientation, they still keep funding these things and for the most part, they all tend to ignore the most (in my belief) universally prevalent sexual orientation - Bisexuality.

My guess is that these studies will keep being funded and run as each person/organization tries to find one that "confirms" their own opinion. Some want ones that say it's all a matter of choice and thus, we can be "cured", others want ones that say it's in the way we are made. Some want ones saying there is not physiological difference between "pure" heterosexuals and Bisexuals, gays, lesbians, etc.; while others want those physiological differences to be found and brought to light.

I am me! I was not made to be a slave to a machine, a way of thinking, or to fit into someone else's predefined little box.

Think they'll ever catch on? :rolleyes:

BiBiologist
May 11, 2006, 11:54 AM
I think it's much more positive to look at it from the other side, i.e., that homo or bisexuality are proven to be natural human forms. If you feel the need to say you're not making excuses for your behavior, that implies you think (or gives credence to others who think) that the behavior is wrong. Yes, you might have control over your behavior, but consider those who are also controlling their behavior within a monogamous same-sex relationship that are still accosted and denied legal status. If you say your behavior is under your full control, then that implies that glb's could deny their natural attractions, and gives ammunition to those who say that they should either behave heterosexually or be celibate. If a behavior is proven natural and accepted as such by the majority of society (you'll never get everybody), then there is no need for guilt.

Additionally, scientific findings don't always help people contemporary with the discoveries. Darwin's "The Origin of Species" was published in 1859 and it is only now becoming fairly widely accepted, though there are still those who don't want to believe the strong evidence that has been presented for evolution in all those years. Scientists can't help that. People are just slow to accept truths that go against the beliefs that they have been raised with and have been handed down for centuries (dare I say the Bible?) If we don't keep looking for the truth we deny the possibility of understanding in future generations, and we deny the hope of happiness for all those who come after us.

JustADuck
May 11, 2006, 12:22 PM
Why aren't bisexuals mentioned?
Because we don't exist, silly!

I think a lot of these studies are pretty harmless. Being around academics, you find that they're just curious bunnies. This is a much more expensive, more sophisticated equivalent to a child going "but why??" So as far as the scientists themselves (as well as Hamer who did the "gay gene" studies in 1993), I think they want to know simply because they want to know.

As for who's funding these studies, that sometimes gets scary.